From: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
To: Peter Boonstoppel <pboonstoppel@nvidia.com>
Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>, Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>,
"linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Paul Gortmaker <paul.gortmaker@windriver.com>,
Henrique de Moraes Holschuh <ibm-acpi@hmh.eng.br>,
Andy Walls <awalls@md.metrocast.net>,
Diwakar Tundlam <dtundlam@nvidia.com>,
Oleg Nesterov <oleg@redhat.com>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>
Subject: RE: [PATCH 1/1] kthread: disable preemption during complete()
Date: Wed, 1 Aug 2012 09:14:22 +0200 (CEST) [thread overview]
Message-ID: <alpine.LFD.2.02.1208010913030.32033@ionos> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <5FBF8E85CA34454794F0F7ECBA79798F379D364860@HQMAIL04.nvidia.com>
On Thu, 26 Jul 2012, Peter Boonstoppel wrote:
> > > tglx has patches that make the kthread create/destroy stuff from hotplug
> > > go away.. that seems like the better approach.
>
> > Right. That cpu hotplug setup/teardown stuff is ugly.
>
> If that stuff gets removed complete that's great. The only change I'm aware of right now is the workqueue one: http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.linux.kernel/1329164
>
> > > The main thing is avoiding the wakeup preemption from the complete()
> > > because we're going to sleep right after anyway.
>
> You are very likely to be preempted by the complete(), since the newly created thread has a relatively high vruntime.
>
> > > The comment doesn't really make that clear.
>
> > Right, the comment is crap. It has nothing to do with kthread_bind()
> > and stuff. The whole purpose is to avoid the pointless preemption
> > after wakeup.
>
> The only case I want to solve is the kthread_bind()->wait_task_inactive() scenario. On our platforms this patch reduces average cpu_up() time from about 9ms to 8ms, but max time goes down from 37ms to 8.5ms. cpu_up() latency becomes much more predictable.
>
There is a bunch of patches in the queue, which kills the full
setup/teardown of per cpu threads and puts those threads into a "park"
position instead.
Thanks,
tglx
prev parent reply other threads:[~2012-08-01 7:14 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 10+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2012-07-25 0:05 [PATCH 1/1] kthread: disable preemption during complete() Peter Boonstoppel
2012-07-25 0:09 ` Tejun Heo
2012-07-25 22:35 ` Peter Boonstoppel
2012-07-25 22:40 ` Tejun Heo
2012-07-26 8:04 ` Peter Zijlstra
2012-07-26 10:47 ` Thomas Gleixner
2012-07-26 15:54 ` Oleg Nesterov
2012-07-26 19:29 ` Peter Zijlstra
2012-07-26 21:16 ` Peter Boonstoppel
2012-08-01 7:14 ` Thomas Gleixner [this message]
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=alpine.LFD.2.02.1208010913030.32033@ionos \
--to=tglx@linutronix.de \
--cc=awalls@md.metrocast.net \
--cc=dtundlam@nvidia.com \
--cc=ibm-acpi@hmh.eng.br \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@elte.hu \
--cc=oleg@redhat.com \
--cc=paul.gortmaker@windriver.com \
--cc=pboonstoppel@nvidia.com \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=tj@kernel.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox